I really should put a comments section (as if I knew) how somewhere... but I'm too lazy to learn. =)
Hmmmm, more anti anti-Tolkien reactions: Noelle, I didn't bother explaning it in the first place because they were random thoughts in my mind. It's one of those days when you just woke up, blurt things out, and pay no attention to them later.
I was also not discrediting Tolkien's contribution to the genre. I mean I think Lord of the Rings set up the model for epic fantasies of what it should be like and what it should have. If you can't write something that goes beyond Tolkien's model or something different, you're just a Tolkien-clone.
I'm also not discounting the fact that of all fantasy books, Lord of the Rings sells the most. Most (older) fantasy readers out there probably got into reading "fantasy" (my definition of the genre, Tin ^^) because of Tolkien. I mean that's why Terry Brooks and Stephen R. Donaldson became best-sellers during their time: because it filled the vacuum that Tokien's absence left (I mean he's not publishing anything new nowadays).
Suffice to say, I don't want the mob mentality that merely equates Tolkien with fantasy. It's like mentioning anime and then the first thing that comes up in people's mind is Sailormoon. Or Dragonball. Or Pokemon. I mean we all know that anime goes beyond that and isn't just defined by one show. The same could be said for my wish. I'm not asking the authors I read to replace Tolkien. What I'm asking is not to be confined to Tolkien.
C.S. Lewis, on the other hand, I find too religious and confining. At least for the Chronicles of Narnia. I haven't read his scifi books. I mean a girl did go to hell for not wearing a dress, among other things. Actually The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe was pretty okay. I can understand why it won awards. It's the books that come after it where you see Lewis is trying to preach rather than to tell (then again, I'm not saying writers should not do this... George Orwell's books are quite propagandist). I posted somewhere a link about the reaction of Philip Pullman (the "successor" to C.S. Lewis) and how he felt about his predecessor. Maybe it's just the context I'm reading it now. Several decades back, I might appreciate it better but now, with all the changes in society, it's hard to. Even the Catholic church has provisions for the changes (PCP II) and how those who aren't Christians can still be saved.
On a more textual analysis, Lewis's world isn't too spectacular. I mean when comparing it with Tolkien, it's bland. Then again, Lewis was writing for children (yes, Tolkien's hobbit was made for children as well... see, I can counter myself ^^). But I think what made him "popular" in his writing is his ideologies. (Hmmmm, am I going to get into trouble for writing this one? I really should post a comments section... I wonder why no one bothers to email me.)
Hmmmm, more anti anti-Tolkien reactions: Noelle, I didn't bother explaning it in the first place because they were random thoughts in my mind. It's one of those days when you just woke up, blurt things out, and pay no attention to them later.
I was also not discrediting Tolkien's contribution to the genre. I mean I think Lord of the Rings set up the model for epic fantasies of what it should be like and what it should have. If you can't write something that goes beyond Tolkien's model or something different, you're just a Tolkien-clone.
I'm also not discounting the fact that of all fantasy books, Lord of the Rings sells the most. Most (older) fantasy readers out there probably got into reading "fantasy" (my definition of the genre, Tin ^^) because of Tolkien. I mean that's why Terry Brooks and Stephen R. Donaldson became best-sellers during their time: because it filled the vacuum that Tokien's absence left (I mean he's not publishing anything new nowadays).
Suffice to say, I don't want the mob mentality that merely equates Tolkien with fantasy. It's like mentioning anime and then the first thing that comes up in people's mind is Sailormoon. Or Dragonball. Or Pokemon. I mean we all know that anime goes beyond that and isn't just defined by one show. The same could be said for my wish. I'm not asking the authors I read to replace Tolkien. What I'm asking is not to be confined to Tolkien.
C.S. Lewis, on the other hand, I find too religious and confining. At least for the Chronicles of Narnia. I haven't read his scifi books. I mean a girl did go to hell for not wearing a dress, among other things. Actually The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe was pretty okay. I can understand why it won awards. It's the books that come after it where you see Lewis is trying to preach rather than to tell (then again, I'm not saying writers should not do this... George Orwell's books are quite propagandist). I posted somewhere a link about the reaction of Philip Pullman (the "successor" to C.S. Lewis) and how he felt about his predecessor. Maybe it's just the context I'm reading it now. Several decades back, I might appreciate it better but now, with all the changes in society, it's hard to. Even the Catholic church has provisions for the changes (PCP II) and how those who aren't Christians can still be saved.
On a more textual analysis, Lewis's world isn't too spectacular. I mean when comparing it with Tolkien, it's bland. Then again, Lewis was writing for children (yes, Tolkien's hobbit was made for children as well... see, I can counter myself ^^). But I think what made him "popular" in his writing is his ideologies. (Hmmmm, am I going to get into trouble for writing this one? I really should post a comments section... I wonder why no one bothers to email me.)
posted by Charles at 5:24 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home